James E. Cecchi Robert S. Schachter Lindsey H. Taylor ...
Transcript of James E. Cecchi Robert S. Schachter Lindsey H. Taylor ...
James E. Cecchi Lindsey H. Taylor CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLDSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C. 5 Becker Farm Road Roseland, New Jersey 07068 (973) 994-1700 Dan Drachler ZWERLING, SCHACHTER & ZWERLING, LLP 1904 Third Avenue, Suite 1030 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 223-2053
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Robert S. Schachter Sona R. Shah ZWERLING, SCHACHTER & ZWERLING, LLP 41 Madison Avenue, 32nd Floor New York, New York 10010 (212) 223-3900
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
ROBERT HALPER, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff,
v.
VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC., Defendant.
Civil Action No.
COMPLAINT AND
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff Robert Halper (“Plaintiff”), by and through his undersigned attorneys, brings
this action on behalf of himself and all others similarly situated, and alleges on information and
belief except as to those allegations relating to him as follows:
INTRODUCTION
1. For over six years, Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (“Volkswagen”) has
intentionally and systematically cheated its customers, lied to the government, and misled the
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 1 of 32 PageID: 1
- 2 -
public about the efficacy of its four cylinder diesel-engine vehicles sold under the Volkswagen
and Audi brands.
2. Volkswagen has falsely marketed its so-called “clean diesel” vehicles as high
performing, fuel efficient, and environmentally-friendly.
3. The Impacted Vehicles, defined below, emit noxious pollutants at up to 40 times
the legal limit allowed under federal and state laws. In order to conceal this fact from regulators
and the public, Volkswagen installed sophisticated software algorithms, or defeat devices
(“Defeat Devices”), in the Impacted Vehicles that causes them to alter the results on emissions
tests by engaging emissions controls only when the Impacted Vehicles are undergoing official
emissions testing. At all other times, the emissions controls are de-activated, and the Impacted
Vehicles emit extremely high, and illegal, levels of pollutants.
4. The vehicles which are the subject matter of this Complaint (the “Impacted
Vehicles”) include at least the following makes and model years sold in the United States:
• 2009 – 2015 Volkswagen Jetta
• 2009 – 2014 Volkswagen Jetta SportWagen
• 2012 – 2015 Volkswagen Beetle
• 2012 – 2015 Volkswagen Beetle Convertible
• 2010 – 2015 Volkswagen Golf
• 2015 – Volkswagen Golf SportWagen
• 2012 – 2015 Volkswagen Passat
• 2010 – 2015 Audi A3
5. The Impacted Vehicles are Volkswagen and Audi vehicles with four cylinder,
Type EA 189 and EA 288 diesel engines, which share a common, uniform, deceitful, and
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 2 of 32 PageID: 2
- 3 -
harmful design, in that they: (a) emit high and illegal levels of pollutants in normal operation;
(b) are equipped with Defeat Devices enabling them to bypass emissions regulations; and (c)
cannot deliver the advertised combination of low emissions, fuel economy, and high
performance.
6. Volkswagen has admitted that the Defeat Devices were present in approximately
482,000 Impacted Vehicles sold in the United States, and more than 11 million vehicles
worldwide.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
7. Jurisdiction arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1331 based upon the federal RICO claims
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1961 et seq., and there is supplemental jurisdiction over the state-law
claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367. Jurisdiction is also proper in this Court pursuant to the
Class Action Fairness Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1332(d), because Plaintiff and many Class Members
(defined below) are citizens of states different from Volkswagen’s home states, and the
aggregate amount in controversy exceeds $5,000,000, exclusive of interest and costs.
8. This Court has personal jurisdiction over Volkswagen because it is incorporated
in New Jersey and conducts regular and continuous business in New Jersey.
9. Venue is proper in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because Volkswagen
is incorporated under the laws of New Jersey and a substantial part of the events and omissions
giving rise to Plaintiff’s claims occurred in this District. Plaintiff resides in and purchased his
Impacted Vehicle in this District. Moreover, Volkswagen conducts business in this District, and
has marketed, advertised, sold and leased the Impacted Vehicles in this District, and has caused
harm to Class Members residing in this District.
PARTIES
10. Plaintiff is a citizen of New Jersey, residing in Upper Montclair, New Jersey.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 3 of 32 PageID: 3
- 4 -
11. In November 2012, Plaintiff purchased a 2013 Jetta TDI from Gensinger Motors
in Clifton, New Jersey.
12. Plaintiff is among those who were deceived and cheated by Volkswagen and who
purchased and/or leased an Impacted Vehicle.
13. Plaintiff purchased the vehicle, and was willing to pay more for the clean diesel
model, because of the advertised combination of low emissions, good fuel economy, and high
torque and performance, and because of the vehicle’s reputation for maintaining a high resale
value for a long time.
14. Unbeknownst to Plaintiff, at the time of acquisition, the vehicle contained a
Defeat Device designed to bypass emissions standards and deceive consumers and regulators,
and the vehicle could not deliver the advertised combination of low emissions, high
performance, and fuel economy. Any proposed “fix” to Plaintiff’s Impacted Vehicle’s emissions
controls will result in decreased fuel economy and/or worse performance, undercutting the
reason Plaintiff purchased the vehicle, and greatly diminishing its resale value.
15. Plaintiff brings this action individually, and on behalf of a Class of all persons
similarly situated in the United States who purchased or leased an Impacted Vehicle, and on
behalf of all persons or entities located in New Jersey that purchased or leased an Impacted
Vehicle in New Jersey (collectively, “Class Members”).
16. Defendant Volkswagen is a corporation doing business in all fifty states, and is
organized and incorporated under the laws of New Jersey. Its principal place of business is in
Herndon, Virginia, and its Eastern Regional headquarters are located in Woodcliff Lake, New
Jersey.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 4 of 32 PageID: 4
- 5 -
17. At all relevant times, Volkswagen and its parent Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft
(“Volkswagen AG”), and/or their dealerships, designed, manufactured, distributed, sold, leased
and warranted the Impacted Vehicles under the Volkswagen and Audi brand names throughout
the nation, and created and distributed, or caused to be created and distributed, the manuals,
advertisements, and other promotional materials relating to the Impacted Vehicles.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
18. This case arises from Volkswagen’s unprecedented, and until recently successful,
efforts to cheat consumers, deceive the public, and bypass federal and state regulations.
A. Volkswagen Markets the Impacted Vehicles as High-Performance, Eco-Friendly,
and Fuel-Efficient Diesel Vehicles
19. Diesel vehicles are generally more fuel efficient and powerful than gasoline
engines. Diesel engines, however, emit higher levels of certain pollutants as a by-product of
combustion.
20. Volkswagen attempted to address diesel engines’ issues with its so-called “clean
diesel” vehicles. In an effort to make the Impacted Vehicles more marketable and induce
consumers to pay premium prices, Volkswagen claimed its clean diesel TDI (turbocharged direct
injection) engines combined fuel efficiency and high performance with low emissions. The
combination of these three characteristics was the primary selling point for the Impacted
Vehicles and was the centerpiece of Volkswagen’s advertising efforts.
21. Some advertisements specifically emphasized the low emissions and eco-
friendliness of the Impacted Vehicles; others touted the Impacted Vehicles’ combination of fuel
efficiency and power; and others claimed that Volkswagen’s new diesel vehicles were clean,
efficient, and powerful all at once.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 5 of 32 PageID: 5
- 6 -
22. Defendant’s advertisements were distributed via the United States mail and via
the internet, a means of interstate and international wire communications.
23. Volkswagen also ran advertisements on television and on the Internet. An
example of a commercial touting how “clean” Volkswagen diesels is available at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WNS2nvkjARk (last visited October 4, 2015). Examples of
commercials touting the fuel efficiency of Volkswagen diesels are available at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2CNHVXvNRo and
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wj3if2gRWYE (last visited October 4, 2015). An example
of a commercial touting the performance of Volkswagen diesels is available at
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0VA51xWXZ3g (last visited October 4, 2015).
24. Volkswagen’s efforts were successful for them as Volkswagens and Audis
became the highest-selling diesel passenger cars in the United States.
25. However, Volkswagen’s “clean diesel” vehicle claims were false.
B. Volkswagen Lied to Its Consumers and Deliberately Concealed the Excessive
and Unlawful Levels of Pollution Emitted by Many of Its So-Called “Clean
Diesel” Vehicles
26. For years, Volkswagen failed to disclose to the public and to consumers the
presence of the Defeat Devices in the Impacted Vehicles and the true nature of their performance
and emissions.
27. On September 18, 2015, the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) issued a
Notice of Violation (“NOV”) of the Clean Air Act to Volkswagen. The NOV explains that
Volkswagen had secretly installed Defeat Devices in certain of its diesel vehicles.
28. The Defeat Device is a complex software algorithm which enables a vehicle to
bypass emissions standards by engaging the emission control function only during official
emissions testing and rendering it inoperative at all other times.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 6 of 32 PageID: 6
- 7 -
29. Vehicles equipped with Defeat Devices meet emissions standards only during
testing; in normal operation they emit pollutants, including nitrogen oxides (“NOx”), at up to 40
times the legal limit.
30. The EPA’s official press release states , NOx is dangerous:
NOx pollution contributes to nitrogen dioxide, ground-level ozone, and fine particulate matter. Exposure to these pollutants has been linked with a range of serious health effects, including increased asthma attacks and other respiratory illnesses that can be serious enough to send people to the hospital. Exposure to ozone and particulate matter have also been associated with premature death due to respiratory-related or cardiovascular-related effects. Children, the elderly, and people with pre-existing respiratory disease are particularly at risk for health effects of these pollutants.1
31. The Clean Air Act expressly prohibits engine parts or components which “bypass,
defeat, or render inoperative” the emission control system. 42 U.S.C. § 7522 (a)(3)(B).
32. Volkswagen violated the Clean Air Act.
33. Volkswagen further violated the Clean Air Act by falsely certifying to the EPA
that the Impacted Vehicles would meet applicable federal emission standards to obtain the EPA-
issued Certificate of Conformity, which is required to sell vehicles in the United States.
34. The Defeat Device was designed by Robert Bosch GmbH (“Bosch”), a German
company that is the world’s largest manufacturer of automotive components.
35. Bosch now claims that the Defeat Device was originally designed only for
experimental purposes and that Bosch allegedly warned Volkswagen as early as 2007 that use of
the software in actual conditions could violate applicable laws.
1 See 2015 Press Releases, EPA, EPA, California Notify Volkswagen of Clean Air Act
Violations, UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, (September 18, 2015), http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/21b8983ffa5d0e4685257dd4006b85e2/dfc8e33b5ab162b985257ec40057813b!OpenDocument. Plaintiff requests that the Court take judicial notice of these public admissions under Fed. R. Evid. 201.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 7 of 32 PageID: 7
- 8 -
36. A group of Volkswagen engineers discovered the use of the Defeat Device in
2011 and brought it, and the fact that the device was illegal, to the attention of company
management. Volkswagen apparently ignored that report and continued their fraudulent and
deceptive practices.
C. Volkswagen Has Admitted Its Fraud
37. Volkswagen AG’s Chief Executive Officer Martin Winterkorn has already
acknowledged the fraud and issued an apology for having “broken the trust of our customers and
the public.”2
38. Volkswagen’s Chief Executive Officer, Michael Horn, conceded that Volkswagen
“was dishonest with the EPA, and the California Air Resources Board, and with all of you.” He
went on to admit that Volkswagen “totally screwed up” and that it “must fix the cars.”
D. Volkswagen Has Reaped Considerable Profit From Its Fraud
39. Volkswagen charged premiums of several thousands of dollars for the Clean
Diesel models of the Impacted Vehicles.
40. These premiums are represented in the chart below and reflect the value
consumers placed on the advertised features of the Clean Diesel vehicles and paid to obtain, and
which Volkswagen promised but did not deliver:
2 Winterkorn subsequently resigned on September 23, 2015.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 8 of 32 PageID: 8
- 9 -
41. Had Volkswagen revealed the truth about the Impacted Vehicles, consumers
would likely have taken their business to other automobile manufacturers and/or Volkswagen
would not have been able to command the premiums described above.
E. Plaintiff and Class Members Have Suffered Harm
42. Volkswagen will not be able to adequately fix the Impacted Vehicles.
43. The EPA has ordered Volkswagen to bring the Impacted Vehicles into
compliance with the emissions standards of the Clean Air Act, but doing so will materially
compromise the vehicles’ performance and/or fuel efficiency.
44. Even if Volkswagen is able to make the Impacted Vehicles EPA-compliant, the
vehicles will no longer perform as previously represented to the public and consumers.
45. As a result, the Impacted Vehicles do not function as represented, and have lost
considerable value. Volkswagen failed to disclose these material facts to the public and to
consumers.
46. Had Plaintiff and Class Members known of the defect at the time they decided to
purchase or lease the Impacted Vehicles, they would have declined to purchase or lease the
vehicles, or would have paid considerably less than they did.
47. Volkswagen’s deliberate deception has caused harm to Plaintiff, Class Members,
and the public.
Model Base Mid-Level Top-Level Average
VW Jetta $2,860.00 $1,570.00 $1,030.00 $1,820.00
VW SportWagen $5,570.00 $1,680.00 $0.00 $2,416.67
VW Golf $2,400.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,466.67
VW Golf SportWagen $2,950.00 $1,000.00 $1,000.00 $1,650.00
VW Beetle $4,635.00 $4,920.00 $0.00 $3,185.00
VW Beetle Convertible $4,080.00 $530.00 $700.00 $1,770.00
VW Passat $5,755.00 $2,845.00 $2,135.00 $3,578.33
Audi A3 $2,300.00 $2,300.00 $2,300.00 $2,300.00
Average $3,818.75 $1,980.63 $1,020.63 $2,273.33
Clean Diesel Price Premium
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 9 of 32 PageID: 9
- 10 -
TOLLING OF THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
Fraudulent Concealment
48. Volkswagen concealed its fraud from the Class.
49. Upon information and belief, Volkswagen has known of the Defeat Devices
installed in the Impacted Vehicles since at least 2009 when it began installing them, and has
intentionally concealed from or failed to notify Plaintiff, Class Members, and the public of the
Defeat Devices and the true emissions and performance of the Impacted Vehicles.
50. The Defeat Devices could only have been installed intentionally by Volkswagen,
and the only purpose of the device was to deceive regulators, consumers, and the public.
51. Despite knowing about the Defeat Devices and unlawful emissions, Volkswagen
did not acknowledge the problem until after the EPA issued its NOV on September 18, 2015.
52. Any applicable statute of limitations has therefore been tolled by Volkswagen’s
knowledge and active concealment of the facts alleged herein.
Estoppel
53. Volkswagen was and is under a continuous duty to disclose to Plaintiff and Class
Members the true character, quality, and nature of the Impacted Vehicles. Instead, it actively
concealed the true character, quality, and nature of the Impacted Vehicles and knowingly made
misrepresentations about their quality, reliability, characteristics, and performance.
54. Plaintiff and Class Members reasonably relied upon Volkswagen’s knowing and
affirmative misrepresentations and/or active concealment of these facts.
55. Based on the foregoing, Volkswagen is estopped from relying on any applicable
statute of limitations in defense of this action.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 10 of 32 PageID: 10
- 11 -
Discovery Rule
56. The causes of action alleged herein did not accrue until Plaintiff and Class
Members discovered that the Impacted Vehicles had the Defeat Devices and were not delivering
the low emissions that were advertised and warranted by Volkswagen.
57. Plaintiff and Class Members had no realistic ability to discover the presence of
the Defeat Devices, or to otherwise learn of the fraud, until it was discovered by the EPA and
California Air Resources Board and revealed to the public on September 18, 2015.
CLASS ACTION ALLEGATIONS
58. Plaintiff brings this lawsuit as a class action on his own behalf and on behalf of all
other persons similarly situated as members of the proposed Class, pursuant to Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure 23(a) and (b)(3) and/or (b)(2) and/or c(4).
59. This action satisfies the numerosity, commonality, typicality, adequacy,
predominance, and superiority requirements of those provisions.
60. The proposed classes are defined as:
Nationwide Class
All persons or entities in the United States that purchased or leased an Impacted Vehicle.
New Jersey Subclass
All persons or entities located in New Jersey that purchased or leased an Impacted Vehicle in New Jersey.
61. Excluded from the Nationwide Class and New Jersey Subclass are:
(a) Volkswagen, any entity or division in which Volkswagen has a controlling interest, and their
legal representatives, officers, directors, assigns, and successors; (b) the Judge to whom this case
is assigned and the Judge’s staff; and (c) those persons who have suffered personal injuries as a
result of the facts alleged herein.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 11 of 32 PageID: 11
- 12 -
62. Plaintiff reserves the right to amend the Class definitions if discovery and further
investigation reveal that either Class should be expanded, divided into additional subclasses, or
modified in any other way.
Numerosity and Ascertainability
63. Although the exact number of Class Members is uncertain, the sizes of the
Nationwide Class and the New Jersey Subclass are large enough that joinder is impracticable.
64. To date, approximately 482,000 vehicles identified as Impacted Vehicles have
been sold or leased in the United States.
65. The disposition of the claims of these Class Members in a single action will
provide substantial benefits to all parties and to the Court.
66. Class Members are readily identifiable from information and records in
Volkswagen’s possession, custody, or control, and/or from state vehicle registration records.
Typicality
67. Plaintiff’s claims are typical of the claims of the Class Members in that the
representative Plaintiff, like all Class Members, purchased or leased an Impacted Vehicle
designed, manufactured, and distributed by Volkswagen.
68. The representative Plaintiff, like all Class Members, has been damaged by
Volkswagen’s misconduct.
69. The bases of Volkswagen’s misconduct are common to all Class Members and
represent a common thread of misconduct resulting in injury to all Class Members.
Adequate Representation
70. Plaintiff is a member of each Class and will fairly and adequately represent and
protect the interests of the Class Members.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 12 of 32 PageID: 12
- 13 -
71. Plaintiff has retained counsel with substantial experience in prosecuting consumer
class actions, including actions involving defective products generally, and defective automobile
parts specifically.
72. Plaintiff and his counsel are committed to vigorously prosecuting this action on
behalf of the Class and have the financial resources to do so.
73. Neither Plaintiff nor his counsel has interests adverse to those of the Class.
Predominance of Common Issues
74. There are numerous questions of law and fact common to Plaintiff and Class
Members that predominate over any question affecting only individual Class Members. The
answers to these common questions will advance resolution of the litigation as to all Class
Members. These common legal and factual issues include:
a. whether the Impacted Vehicles contained Defeat Devices and emitted
unlawful levels of pollutants under normal operation;
b. whether Volkswagen knew or should have known about the Defeat
Devices and emission levels in the Impacted Vehicles;
c. whether the true nature of the Impacted Vehicles’ performance, emissions
levels, fuel economy, and the inclusion of the Defeat Devices constitute material facts that
reasonable consumers would have considered in deciding whether to purchase an Impacted
Vehicle;
d. whether Volkswagen made material misrepresentations regarding the
Impacted Vehicles.
e. whether Volkswagen had a duty to disclose the true nature of the Impacted
Vehicles to Plaintiff and Class Members;
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 13 of 32 PageID: 13
- 14 -
f. whether Volkswagen omitted and failed to disclose material facts about
the Impacted Vehicles;
g. whether Volkswagen’s concealment of the true nature of the Impacted
Vehicles would have induced a reasonable consumer to act to their detriment by purchasing
and/or leasing the Impacted Vehicles;
h. whether Plaintiff and Class Members are entitled to a declaratory
judgment; and
i. whether Plaintiff and Class Members are entitled to equitable relief,
including, but not limited to, a preliminary and/or permanent injunction.
Superiority
75. Plaintiff and Class Members have all suffered and will continue to suffer harm
and damages as a result of Volkswagen’s unlawful and wrongful conduct. A class action is
superior to other available methods for the fair and efficient adjudication of this controversy.
76. Absent a class action, most Class Members would likely find the cost of litigating
their claims prohibitively high and would therefore have no effective remedy at law. Because of
the relatively small size of the individual Class Members’ claims, it is likely that only a few
Class Members could afford to seek legal redress for Volkswagen’s misconduct. Absent a class
action, Class Members will continue to incur damages, and Volkswagen’s misconduct will
continue without remedy.
77. Class treatment of common questions of law and fact is also superior to initiating
multiple individual actions or piecemeal litigation in that class treatment will conserve the
resources of the courts and the litigants, and will promote consistency and efficiency of
adjudication.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 14 of 32 PageID: 14
- 15 -
78. Volkswagen has acted in a uniform manner with respect to Plaintiff and Class
Members.
79. Classwide declaratory, equitable, and injunctive relief is appropriate under
Rule 23(b)(1) and/or (b)(2) because Volkswagen has acted on grounds that apply generally to the
Class Members, and inconsistent adjudications with respect to the Volkswagen’s liability would
establish incompatible standards and substantially impair or impede the ability of Class Members
to protect their interests.
80. Class wide relief assures fair, consistent, and equitable treatment and protection of
all Class Members, and uniformity and consistency in Volkswagen’s discharge of their duties to
perform corrective action regarding the s.
FIRST COUNT
Common Law Fraud
(Brought on Behalf of the Nationwide Class)
81. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the
preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
82. Plaintiff brings this Count on behalf of the Nationwide Class.
83. Volkswagen engaged in both speaking and silent fraud, and in fraudulent and
deceptive conduct.
84. As described above, Volkswagen’s conduct defrauded Plaintiff and Class
Members, intending and leading them to believe, through affirmative misrepresentations,
omissions, suppression and concealments of material fact, that the Impacted Vehicles, marketed
by Volkswagen as “clean diesel” vehicles, possessed important characteristics that they in fact
did not possess—namely the combination of low emissions, high performance, and fuel
economy—and inducing their purchases.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 15 of 32 PageID: 15
- 16 -
85. Volkswagen’s intentional and material misrepresentations included, among other
things, its advertising, marketing materials and messages, and other standardized statements
claiming the Impacted Vehicles: (a) were clean and eco-friendly; and (b) combined low
emissions with high performance and strong fuel economy.
86. The foregoing misrepresentations were uniform across all Class Members.
87. The same advertisements were utilized by Volkswagen respecting the Impacted
Vehicles and the same marketing materials respecting the Impacted Vehicles were distributed to
customers and potential customers.
88. The advertisements and marketing materials contained the same standardized
general statements relating to the Impacted Vehicles’ environmental friendliness, performance
and fuel economy.
89. These representations directly contradicted the true nature and hidden design of
the Impacted Vehicles and their actual emissions when operating under normal circumstances.
Volkswagen knew the representations were false when it made them, and intended to defraud
purchasers thereby.
90. Volkswagen also had a duty to disclose, rather than conceal and suppress, the full
scope and extent of the emissions deception because:
a. Volkswagen had exclusive knowledge of the actual emissions in the
Impacted Vehicles and concealment thereof;
b. The details regarding the actual emissions in the Impacted Vehicles and
concealment thereof were known and/or accessible only to Volkswagen;
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 16 of 32 PageID: 16
- 17 -
c. Volkswagen knew Plaintiff and Class Members did not know and could
not reasonably discover the actual emissions in the Impacted Vehicles and the concealment
thereof; and
d. Volkswagen made general representations about the qualities of the
Impacted Vehicles, including statements about their performance, fuel economy, and emissions,
which were misleading, deceptive and incomplete without the disclosure of the fact that
Volkswagen secretly designed and installed Defeat Devices on the Impacted Vehicles that was
intended to conceal the vehicles’ exceedingly high and illegal emission levels from governments,
consumers, and the public.
91. Volkswagen’s concealment was likewise uniform across all Class Members in
that Volkswagen concealed from everyone, including potential customers and regulators, the true
facts relating to the emission levels of the Impacted Vehicles.
92. Volkswagen’s misrepresentations and omissions were material in that they would
affect a reasonable consumer’s decision to purchase or lease an Impacted Vehicle.
93. Consumers paid a premium for the clean diesel Impacted Vehicles precisely
because they supposedly offered low emissions and fuel economy without sacrificing
performance.
94. Volkswagen’s conduct, misrepresentations, omissions, concealment, and
suppression undermined the core value proposition that induced consumers to purchase or lease
the Impacted Vehicles, and directly affect both the quality and worth of the vehicles.
95. Volkswagen’s intentionally deceptive conduct—its silent fraud and fraud by
concealment—likewise induced the Impacted Vehicles’ purchase by Plaintiff and Class
Members, and the resulting harm and damage to them.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 17 of 32 PageID: 17
- 18 -
96. Plaintiff relied upon Volkswagen’s misrepresentations and concealment of the
true facts.
97. Class Members are presumed to have relied upon Volkswagen’s
misrepresentations and concealment of the true facts because those facts are material to
reasonable consumers’ purchases of the Impacted Vehicles.
98. As a result of Volkswagen’s inducements, Plaintiff and Class Members have
sustained significant damage, including, but not limited to, lost vehicle value and diminished
vehicle quality and utility.
99. Volkswagen is therefore liable to Plaintiff and Class Members in an amount to be
proven at trial.
100. Volkswagen intentionally designed and engineered its “clean diesel” vehicles to
deceive and cheat regulators and its customers.
101. Volkswagen touted the performance and environmental virtues of these vehicles,
while concealing and suppressing the truth about them, for the purpose of inducing Plaintiff and
the Class to buy them.
102. Volkswagen’s fraud caused both the purchase and the harm.
103. In order to undo this harm, Volkswagen must repair or remediate the vehicles so
that they deliver everything it promised when it sold them, or undertake to buy them back from
Class Members in terms that are just and equitable under principles of rescission, restitution, and
benefit of the bargain.
104. Volkswagen’s conduct was systematic, repetitious, knowing, intentional, and
malicious, and demonstrated a lack of care and reckless disregard for the rights and interests of
Plaintiff, the public, and the environment.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 18 of 32 PageID: 18
- 19 -
105. Volkswagen’s conduct thus warrants an assessment of punitive damages,
consistent with the actual harm it has caused, the reprehensibility of its conduct, and the need to
punish and deter such conduct.
SECOND COUNT
Unjust Enrichment
(Brought on Behalf of the Nationwide Class)
106. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the
preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
107. Plaintiff brings this Count on behalf of the Nationwide Class.
108. Volkswagen has been unjustly enriched in that it intentionally sold or leased the
Impacted Vehicles with Defeat Devices which were intended to mask the fact that the Impacted
Vehicles did not comply with applicable automobile exhaust regulations and could not deliver
the combination of low emissions, high performance, and fuel economy promised to consumers.
109. Plaintiff and Class Members conferred a benefit on Volkswagen by purchasing or
leasing , and paying a premium for, the Impacted Vehicles.
110. When purchasing or leasing their vehicles, Plaintiff and Class Members
reasonably believed that the Impacted Vehicles complied with applicable environmental
regulations and, if properly tested in accordance with EPA mileage standards, would achieve the
mileage stated on the window sticker of the vehicles.
111. Plaintiff and Class Members got less than what they paid for their Impacted
Vehicles.
112. Volkswagen knows of and appreciates the benefit conferred by Plaintiff and Class
Members and has retained that benefit notwithstanding its knowledge that the benefit is unjust.
113. Volkswagen should therefore be required to disgorge the unjust enrichment.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 19 of 32 PageID: 19
- 20 -
THIRD COUNT
Breach Of Express Warranty
(Brought on Behalf of the Nationwide Class)
114. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the
preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
115. Plaintiff brings this Count on behalf of the Nationwide Class.
116. By advertising the “green” and “clean” qualities of its diesel engines, Volkswagen
expressly warranted to Plaintiff and Class Members that the vehicles at least complied with all
applicable laws and regulations relating to exhaust emissions, as it would be impossible for an
automobile to be “green” if it emitted more pollutants than were allowed by applicable
environmental laws and regulations.
117. By advertising the low emissions in combination with statements regarding the
performance, torque, and fuel efficiency, Volkswagen warranted to purchasers of the Impacted
Vehicles that the vehicles would exhibit this combination of characteristics.
118. Such statements became the basis of the bargain for Plaintiff and Class Members
because such statements are among the facts a reasonable consumer would consider material in
the purchase of a vehicle.
119. Volkswagen stated that the Impacted Vehicles achieved certain fuel economy
when tested in accordance with applicable EPA regulations.
120. These statements created an express warranty that the vehicle achieved the stated
fuel efficiency, allowing consumers to make apples-to-apples comparisons with other vehicles.
121. Testing under EPA regulations presupposes that the vehicles comply with all laws
and regulations applicable to automobiles, including environmental regulations.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 20 of 32 PageID: 20
- 21 -
122. Had the Impacted Vehicles been tested in accordance with EPA fuel efficiency
standards while also complying with pollution regulations, they would have achieved
significantly lower fuel efficiency than was stated on the EPA mileage sticker on the vehicle.
123. The Impacted Vehicles are not adequately labeled because they misstate that the
Impacted Vehicles comply with EPA regulations, and the stated gas mileage for comparison
purposes was not achieved by testing in accordance with EPA testing procedures.
124. As a result of the foregoing breaches of express warranty, Plaintiff and Class
Members have been damaged.
FOURTH COUNT
Violation Of Magnuson-Moss Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 2301, Et Seq. –
Implied Warranty
(Brought on Behalf of the Nationwide Class)
125. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the
preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
126. Plaintiff brings this Count on behalf of the Nationwide Class.
127. The Impacted Vehicles are “consumer products” within the meaning of the
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2301(1).
128. Plaintiff and Class Members are “consumers” within the meaning of the
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2301(3), because they are persons entitled under
applicable state law to enforce against the warrantor the obligations of its express and implied
warranties.
129. Volkswagen is a “supplier” and “warrantor” within the meaning of the
Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2301(4)-(5).
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 21 of 32 PageID: 21
- 22 -
130. Section 2310(d)(1) of Chapter 15 of the United States Code provides a cause of
action for any consumer who is damaged by the failure of a warrantor to comply with a written
or implied warranty.
131. Volkswagen provided Plaintiff and Class Members with an implied warranty of
merchantability in connection with the purchase or lease of their vehicles that is an “implied
warranty” within the meaning of the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act, 15 U.S.C. § 2301(7).
132. As a part of the implied warranty of merchantability, Volkswagen warranted that
the Impacted Vehicles would pass without objection in the trade as designed, manufactured, and
marketed, and were adequately labeled.
133. Volkswagen breached these implied warranties, as described in more detail above,
and are therefore liable to Plaintiff and the Class pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(1).
134. Any efforts to limit the implied warranties in a manner that would exclude
coverage of the Impacted Vehicles is unconscionable, and any such effort to disclaim, or
otherwise limit, liability for the Impacted Vehicles is null and void.
135. Plaintiff and Class Members have had sufficient direct dealings with either
Volkswagen or its agents (dealerships) to establish privity of contract.
136. Plaintiff and Class Members are intended third-party beneficiaries of contracts
between Volkswagen and its dealers, and specifically, of the implied warranties.
137. The dealers were not intended to be the ultimate consumers of the Impacted
Vehicles and have no rights under the warranty agreements provided with the vehicles.
138. The warranty agreements were designed for and intended to benefit consumers.
139. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 2310(e), Plaintiff is entitled to bring this class action and
is not required to give Volkswagen notice and an opportunity to cure until such time as the Court
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 22 of 32 PageID: 22
- 23 -
determines the representative capacity of Plaintiff pursuant to Rule 23 of the Federal Rules of
Civil Procedure.
140. Plaintiff’s individual claims place into controversy an amount equal to or
exceeding $25. The amount in controversy of this entire action exceeds the sum of $50,000,
exclusive of interest and costs, computed on the basis of all claims to be determined in this
lawsuit.
141. Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of Class Members, seeks all damages
permitted by law, including diminution in value of their vehicles, in an amount to be proven at
trial.
142. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 2310(d)(2), Plaintiff and Class Members are entitled to
recover a sum equal to the aggregate amount of costs and expenses (including attorneys’ fees
based on actual time expended) determined by the Court to have reasonably been incurred by
Plaintiff and Class Members in connection with the commencement and prosecution of this
action.
143. Plaintiff and Class Members are also entitled to equitable relief under 15 U.S.C. §
2310(d)(1).
FIFTH COUNT
Violation Of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c),
The Racketeer Influenced And Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”))
(Brought on Behalf of the Nationwide Class)
144. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the
preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
145. Plaintiff brings this Count on behalf of the Nationwide Class.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 23 of 32 PageID: 23
- 24 -
146. Plaintiff and Class Members are “person[s] injured in his or her business or
property” by reason of Volkswagen’s violation of RICO within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. §
1964(c).
147. Volkswagen, Volkswagen AG, and Bosch are all “persons” under 18 U.S.C. §
1961(3).
148. Volkswagen, Volkswagen AG, and Bosch violated 18 U.S.C. § 1962(c) by
participating in or conducting the affairs of the Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise through a pattern
of repeatedly defrauding consumers.
149. The methodology of the fraud is set forth above and is described in this Count.
The persons participating in the Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise and their respective roles in the
Enterprise are set forth below.
150. For purposes of this Count, Volkswagen, Volkswagen AG, and Bosch
undertook a fraudulent scheme to sell or lease the Impacted Vehicles through the use of false and
misleading statements and omissions relating to the environmental and performance qualities of
the Impacted Vehicles, through the use of the U.S. mails, and interstate and international wire,
radio and television transmissions.
151. At all relevant times and as described above, Volkswagen, Volkswagen AG, and
Bosch carried out their scheme to defraud Plaintiff and Class Members in connection with the
conduct of an “enterprise” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4).
152. The Enterprise consisted of the following persons, and others presently unknown,
who constitute an “association-in-fact enterprise” within the meaning of RICO and who
collectively constitute the “Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise” or “Enterprise”: (a) Volkswagen; (b)
Volkswagen AG; and (c) Bosch.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 24 of 32 PageID: 24
- 25 -
153. The Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise, whose activities affected interstate and
foreign commerce, is an association in fact of individuals and corporate entities within the
meaning of 18 U.S.C. § 1961(4) and consists of persons associated together for the common
purpose of selling the Impacted Vehicles that the members of the Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise
knew did not actually comply with U.S. environmental laws, were not “green,” and could not
deliver the performance and fuel efficiency promised by Volkswagen if the Impacted Vehicles
had complied with U.S. environmental laws.
154. Volkswagen, Volkswagen AG and Bosch and their respective officers and
employees together developed the Impacted Vehicles with the Defeat Devices
and Volkswagen and Volkswagen AG developed the false, misleading and/or deceptive
advertisements for them, as described above.
155. The Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise was formed in or about 2009 and continues to
the present.
156. The Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise was separate and distinct from the pattern of
racketeering activity.
157. The Enterprise was an ongoing organization or group and existed to advance the
interests of the individual entities that comprise its membership, i.e., selling or leasing the
Impacted Vehicles described above.
158. The Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise members all served the common purpose of
selling or leasing as many Impacted Vehicles as possible, therein maximizing their own profits
and revenues and sharing the bounty derived from deceived and defrauded consumers.
159. Each member of the Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise benefited from the common
purpose: Volkswagen and Volkswagen AG sold or leased more Impacted Vehicles, and received
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 25 of 32 PageID: 25
- 26 -
more for those than they otherwise would have, had the impacted Vehicles been truthfully
advertised, marketed and labeled; because Volkswagen and Volkswagen AG sold or leased more
Impacted Vehicles, Bosch sold more components to go into the Impacted Vehicles, thus earning
more profits than it would have otherwise.
160. The Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise also exists for the legitimate purpose of selling
automobiles. It operates within a framework that includes the sale of other automobiles that are
not infected with fraud.
161. Each member of the Enterprise performs a role in the group consistent with its
structure that furthers the activities of the Clean Diesel RICO Enterprise in connection with the
Enterprise members’ sale of Impacted Vehicles to consumers.
162. Alternatively, the Enterprise was formed solely for the purpose of carrying out the
pattern of racketeering acts described herein.
163. Through the conduct of the Enterprise, Volkswagen, Volkswagen AG, and Bosch
undertook a fraudulent scheme to sell the Impacted Vehicles based upon the false and misleading
misrepresentations and omissions set forth herein.
164. Through this scheme, Volkswagen, Volkswagen AG, and Bosch
and others agreed to utilize the false and misleading representations and omissions relating to the
Impacted Vehicles in a conscious and deliberate effort to sell Impacted Vehicles at a premium
price, while in fact, the Impacted Vehicles were not “green”, and could not achieve the
advertised performance and fuel efficiency had they complied with applicable environmental
laws.
165. Alternatively, the Impacted Vehicles sold or leased through the Clean Diesel
RICO Enterprise had significantly less value than consumers paid for them because they were
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 26 of 32 PageID: 26
- 27 -
illegal to sell or lease in the first instance and now have significantly lower resale or residual
value as a result of the fraud becoming public.
166. In furtherance of the scheme, Volkswagen and Volkswagen AG
engaged in thousands of acts of mail fraud and wire fraud, each of which constitute “racketeering
activity,” as that term is defined in 18 U.S.C. § 1961(1).
167. Those acts of mail fraud and wire fraud include generally distributing the false
and misleading marketing materials described herein via mail, television, radio, and the Internet
to members of the public as well as communicating among themselves with respect to the
scheme via interstate and international email and telephone with the common purpose of selling
or leasing the Impacted Vehicles to an unsuspecting public based upon the fraudulent and
deceptive representations and omissions described above.
168. In addition to the foregoing, each download or view of an advertisement or video
on the internet constituted a separate offense of wire fraud.
169. As a direct result of the foregoing violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1962(d), Plaintiff and
Class Members have been injured in their business and/or property in multiple ways, including
that they paid for Impacted Vehicles which did not, and could not, provide the benefits promised
in the advertisements and other promotional materials associated with the vehicles and incurred
resulting out-of-pocket losses.
170. But for the predicate acts described above – Volkswagen and Volkswagen AG’s
numerous false and misleading statements (and marketing and advertising containing omissions)
sent via the U.S. mail and interstate wires – Plaintiff and Class Members would not have paid as
high a price as they did for the Impacted Vehicles, or would not have purchased or leased the
Impacted Vehicles.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 27 of 32 PageID: 27
- 28 -
171. The RICO violations described herein have directly and proximately caused
injuries and damages to Plaintiff and Class Members, and Plaintiff and Class Members are
entitled to bring this action for three times their actual damages, as well as injunctive and/or
equitable relief and costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1964(a) and
1964(c).
SIXTH COUNT
Violation Of The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act
(N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 Et Seq.)
(Brought on Behalf of the New Jersey Subclass)
172. Plaintiff hereby incorporates by reference the allegations contained in the
preceding paragraphs of this Complaint.
173. Plaintiff brings this Count on behalf of the New Jersey Subclass.
174. The New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act (N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 et seq.) (“NJCFA”) states,
in relevant part:
[A]ny unconscionable commercial practice, deception, fraud, false pretense, false promise, misrepresentation, or the knowing concealment, suppression, or omission of any material fact with intent that others rely upon such concealment, suppression or omission, in connection with the sale or advertisement of any merchandise. . . .is declared to be an unlawful practice…”
N.J.S.A. 56:8-2.
175. Plaintiff and New Jersey Subclass Members are consumers who purchased and/or
leased Impacted Vehicles for personal, family, or household use.
176. The advertisement, promotion, distribution, supply, sale, or lease of the Impacted
Vehicles is a “sale or advertisement” of “merchandise” governed by the NJCFA.
177. Prior to Plaintiff’s and New Jersey Subclass Members’ purchase or lease of the
Impacted Vehicles, Volkswagen violated the NJCFA by making:
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 28 of 32 PageID: 28
- 29 -
a. uniform representations that its diesel vehicles were of a particular standard, quality, or grade when they were and are not, and that they would perform as represented when they did not, as set forth above; and b. false and/or misleading statements about the capacity and characteristics of the Impacted Vehicles, as set forth above, that were unfair, deceptive, or otherwise fraudulent, had and continue to have the capacity to, and did, deceive the public and cause injury to Plaintiff and New Jersey Subclass Members.
178. Volkswagen, in its communications with and disclosures to the Plaintiff and New
Jersey Subclass Members, intentionally concealed or otherwise failed to disclose that the
Impacted Vehicles included Defeat Devices designed to cheat emissions testing, that the true
emissions of those Vehicles were far higher than claimed, and that the Vehicles were incapable
of achieving the advertised combination of low emissions, high performance, and fuel efficiency.
179. Plaintiff and New Jersey Subclass Members reasonably expected that the
Impacted Vehicles complied with the represented and claimed emissions both prior to and at the
time of purchase or lease, and reasonably expected that Volkswagen did not use software or any
other device or system to cheat emissions testing.
180. These representations and affirmations of fact made by Volkswagen, and the facts
it concealed or failed to disclose, are material facts that were likely to deceive reasonable
consumers, and that reasonable consumers would, and did, rely upon in deciding whether or not
to purchase or lease an Impacted Vehicle. Moreover, Volkswagen intended for consumers,
including Plaintiff and New Jersey Subclass Members, to rely on these material facts.
181. Volkswagen had exclusive knowledge that the Impacted Vehicles had and have
the defects set forth above which gave rise to a duty to disclose these facts. Volkswagen
breached that duty by failing to disclose these material facts.
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 29 of 32 PageID: 29
- 30 -
182. The injury to consumers by this conduct greatly outweighs any alleged
countervailing benefits to consumers or competition under all circumstances. There is a strong
public interest in reducing emission levels, as well as truthfully advertising emission levels.
183. Had Plaintiff and New Jersey Subclass Members known about Volkswagen’s use
of the Defeat Devices, and/or that the Impacted Vehicles did not comply with Volkswagen’s
advertised emissions and did not operate as advertised, they would not have purchased and/or
leased the Impacted Vehicles or would have paid less than they did for them.
184. As a direct and proximate result of Volkswagen’s actions, Plaintiff and New
Jersey Subclass Members have suffered ascertainable loss and other damages.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
requests that the Court enter judgment against Volkswagen, as follows:
A. an order certifying the proposed Nationwide Class, designating Plaintiff as the
named representative of the Nationwide Class, and designating the undersigned as Class
Counsel;
B. an order certifying the proposed New Jersey Subclass, designating Plaintiff as the
named representative of the New Jersey Subclass, and designating the undersigned as Class
Counsel;
C. a declaration that Volkswagen is financially responsible for notifying all Class
Members about the true nature of the Impacted Vehicles;
D. an order enjoining Volkswagen to desist from further deceptive distribution, sales,
and lease practices with respect to the Impacted Vehicles, and directing Volkswagen to
permanently, expeditiously, and completely repair the Impacted Vehicles;
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 30 of 32 PageID: 30
- 31 -
E. an order compelling Volkswagen to buy back the Impacted Vehicles on fair and
equitable terms;
F. an award to Plaintiff and the Class Members of compensatory, exemplary,
punitive, and statutory penalties and damages, including interest, in an amount to be proven at
trial;
G. an award to Plaintiff and the Class Members for the return of the purchase prices
of the Impacted Vehicles, with interest from the time it was paid, for the reimbursement of the
reasonable expenses occasioned by the sale, for damages and for reasonable attorney fees;
H. a declaration that Volkswagen must disgorge, for the benefit of Plaintiff and the
Class Members, all or part of the ill-gotten profits received from the sale or lease of the Impacted
Vehicles, and make full restitution to Plaintiff and Class Members;
I. an award of treble damages pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 1964(a) and 1964(c);
J. an award of treble damages pursuant to N.J.S.A. 56:8-19;
K. an award of attorneys’ fees and costs, as allowed by law;
L. an award of pre-judgment and post-judgment interest, as provided by law;
M. leave to amend this Complaint to conform to the evidence produced at trial; and
N. such other relief as may be appropriate under the circumstances.
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 38(b), Plaintiff demands a trial by jury of any
and all issues in this action so triable of right.
Dated: October 5, 2015 CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLDSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C.
By: /s/ James E. Cecchi JAMES E. CECCHI
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 31 of 32 PageID: 31
- 32 -
James E. Cecchi Lindsey H. Taylor CARELLA, BYRNE, CECCHI, OLDSTEIN, BRODY & AGNELLO, P.C. 5 Becker Farm Road Roseland, New Jersey 07068 (973) 994-1700
Dan Drachler ZWERLING, SCHACHTER & ZWERLING, LLP 1904 Third Avenue, Suite 1030 Seattle, Washington 98101 (206) 223-2053 Robert S. Schachter Sona R. Shah ZWERLING, SCHACHTER & ZWERLING, LLP 41 Madison Avenue, 32nd Floor New York, New York 10010 (212) 223-3900
Attorneys for Plaintiff
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 32 of 32 PageID: 32
CIVIL COVER SHEET ^ 5 44 (Rev. 11/04)
T h e JS 4 4 c iv i l c o v e r s h e e t and the i n f o r m a t i o n c o n t a i n e d h e r e i n n e i t h e r r e p l a c e n o r s u p p l e m e n t t he f i l i ng a n d s e r v i c e o f p l e a d i n g s o r o t h e r p a p e r s a s r e q u i r e d by l aw, e x c e p t as p r o v i d e d b y local r u l e s o f c o u r t . T h i s f o r m , a p p r o v e d b y the Jud ic i a l C o n f e r e n c e of t he U n i t e d S t a t e s in S e p t e m b e r 1974 , is r e q u i r e d f o r the u s e of t h e C l e r k of C o u r t f o r t he p u r p o s e o f in i t ia t ing t h e civil d o c k e t shee t . (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON THE REVERSE OF THE F O R M )
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS Robert Halper
DEFENDANTS Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.
(b) C o u n t y o f R e s i d e n c e o f Fi rs t L is ted P l a i n t i f f Esses (EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES)
C o u n t y o f R e s i d e n c e o f Fi rs t L i s t ed D e f e n d a n t
(IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAND CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF THE
LAND INVOLVED.
( c ) A t t o r n e y ' s (Finn Name, Address, and Telephone Number)
Carella, Byrne, Cecchi, Olstein, Brody & Agnello, 5 Becker Farm Road, Roseland, New Jersey 07068
A t t o r n e y s (If Known)
II. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Place an "X" in One Box Only) III. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Place an "X" One Box for Plamnff (For Diversity Cases Only) and One Box for Defendant)
• 1 U.S. Government Plaintiff
15 3 Federal Question (U.S. Government Not a Party)
PTF DEF CI 1 L! 1 Incorporated or Principal Place
of Business In This State
PTF DEF • 4 • 4 Citizen of This State
a 2 O 2 U.S. Government Defendant
• 4 Diversity D 2 Incorporated arid Principal Place of Business In Another State
• 5 G 5 Citizen of Another State
(Indicate Citizenship of Parties in Item III)
L3 3 • 3 Foreign Nation 01 6 • 6 Citizen or Subject of a Foreign Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Place an "X" in One Box Only) FORFEITURE/PENALTY BANKRUPTCY OTHER STATUTES C O N T R A C T TORTS
• 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 • 423 Withdrawal
28 USC 157
• 400 State Reapportionment • 410 Antitrust • 430 Banks and Banking O 450 Commerce O 460 Deportation (0 470 Racketeer Influenced and
Corrupt Organizations O 480 Consumer Credit
O l l O Insurance O 120 Marine
• 610 Agriculture O 620 Other Food & Drug • 625 Drug Related Seizure
of Property 21 USC 881 • 630 Liquor Laws • 640 R.R. & Truck
PERSONAL INJURY PERSONAL INJURY • 310 Airplane • 315 Airplane Product
Liability L) 320 Assault, Libel &
Slander • 330 Federal Employers'
Liability O 340 Marine D 345 Marine Product
Liability O 350 Motor Vehicle O 355 Motor Vehicle
Product Liability G 360 Other Personal
(3 362 Personal Injury -Med. Malpractice
n 365 Personal Injury -Product Liability
• 368 Asbestos Personal
• 130 Miller Act O 140 Negotiable Instrument O 150 Recovery of Overpayment
& Enforcement of Judgment O 151 Medicare Act L! 152 Recovery of Defaulted
Student Loans (Excl. Veterans)
G 153 Recovery of Overpayrnent
of Veteran's Benefits L? 160 Stockholders 'Sui ts & 190 Other Contract CI 195 Contract Product Liability • 196 Franchise
I PROPERTY RIGHTS -
O 820 Copyrights D 830 Patent 0 650 Airline Regs.
0 660 Occupational Injury Product Liability
PERSONAL PROPERTY 0 370 Other Fraud D 371 Truth in Lending 0 380 Other Persona!
0 840 Trademark O 490 Cable/Sat TV Safety/Health
0 690 Other 0 810 Selective Service 0 850 Sec unties/Commodities/
Exchange 0 875 Customer Challenge
LABOR SOCIAL SECURITY O 861 HIA (1395ff) 0 862 Black Lung (923) 0 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) 0 864 SS1D Title XVI 0 865 RSI (405(g))
FEDERAL TAX SUITS
0 710 Fair Labor Standards Property Damage
0 385 Property Damage Product Liability
Act G 720 Labor/Mgmt. Relations G 730 Labor/Mgmt. Reporting
& Disclosure Act 0 740 Railway Labor Act 0 790 Other Labor Litigation G 791 Empj. Ret. Inc.
Secunty Act
12 USC 3410 0 890 Other Statutory Actions 0 891 Agricultural Acts 0 892 Economic Stabilization Act O 893 Environmental Matters 0 894 Energy Allocation Act 0 895 Freedom of information
Injury CIVIL RIGHTS i REAL PROPERTY PRISONER PETITIONS
0 870 Taxes (U.S. Plaintiff 0 210 Land Condemnation O 220 Foreclosure 0 230 Rem Lease & Fyectment 0 240 Torts to Land 0 245 Tort Product Liability 0 290 All Other Real Property
0 441 Voting 0 510 Motions to Vacate 0 442 Employment or Defendant) Sentence
0 871 IRS—Third Party 26 USC 7609
0 443 Housing/ Habeas Corpus-. 0 530 General Accommodations Act
0 900Appeal of Fee Determination Under Equal Access to justice
0 950 Constitutionality of State Statutes
0 444 Welfare 0 535 Death Penalty 0 540 Mandamus & Other 0 445 Amer. w/Disabilities -0 550 Civil Rights Employment
0 446 Amer. w/Disabilities - 0 555 Prison Condition Other
0 440 Other Civil Rights
V. ORIGIN A p p e a l to Di s t r i c t i - i -7 J u d g e f r o m
.Magis t ra te J u d g m e n t
(Place an "X" in One Box Only)
R e m o v e d f r o m S ta t e C o u r t
T r a n s f e r r e d f r o m a n o t h e r d i s t r i c t ( spec i fV)
• 2 • 3 • 4 • 5 • 6 m i O r i g i n a l P r o c e e d i n g
R e m a n d e d f r o m A p p e l l a t e C o u r t
R e i n s t a t e d o r R e o p e n e d
M u l t i d i s t r i c t L i t i ga t i on
. Civ i l .. sec
Qi u n d e r w h i c h y o u are f i l i ng ( D o n o t c i t e j u r i s d i c t i o n a l s t a t u t e s u n l e s s d i v e r s i t y ) :
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION Br ie f d e s c r i p t i o n o f c a u s e : This is a claim relating to non-EPA compliant vehicles
VII. REQUESTED IN 0 C H E C K IF T H I S IS A CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT:
DEMAND $ C H E C K Y E S on ly if d e m a n d e d in c o m p l a i n t :
JURY DEMAND: 0 Yes • No U N D E R F . R . C . P . 2 3
VIII. RELATED CASE(S) IF ANY
(See instructions): J U D G E Linares D O C K E T N U M B E R 15-6985
DATE SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEY OF RECORD
10/05/2015 FOR OFFICE l iSE ONLY
APPLYING IFPi RECEIPT # AMOUNT JUDGE MAG, JUDGE
Case 2:15-cv-07293-JLL-JAD Document 1-1 Filed 10/05/15 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 33